Geoforum, Vol 20, No. 3, pp. 329-337. 1989 Printed in Great Britain

00167185189 53.00+ 0.00 0 19R9 Pergamon Press plc

Spatial Patterns of Human Ecosystem Productivity in South West Africa

(Namibia)

DONOVAN C. WILKTN,* Tucson, AZ, U.S.A.

Abstract: Understanding the biological, economic and motivational bases for human productivity is essential to more effective development activity in the Third World. One way to develop this understanding is to study spatial patterns of productivity. Productivity is compared for two human ecosystems in Namibia. The first consists of the territory’s traditional, communal Third World areas, and the second, the commercial first-world areas. Three kinds of productivity are considered: biological productivity (crops, livestock, wildlife, human population, etc.); economic produc- tivity (production and exchange of goods and services); and needs satisfaction productivity (levels of satisfaction relative to an individual’s or a culture’s hierarchy of values). Productivity in Namibia is extremely low at present compared to its potential. The productivity in traditional areas is, by most measures, substantially lower than in the commercial areas of the territory. With the possible exception of human reproduction, biological productivity is being severely restricted by Namibia’s aridity. In the traditional areas this, in turn, is exacerbated by cultural behaviors, culminating in progressive loss of both soil fertility and useable moisture. Economic productivity throughout the territory is low because of limited capital resources and Western economic sanctions. In traditional areas, this is compounded by conflicting cultural values, physical and economic isolation, inappropriate education, and severe shortage of productive resources. Needs satisfaction productivity is not well measured. Indications are that, in traditional areas, it is particularly low in the areas of job availability, education, health and governance. Causes postulated for these regional differences in productivity include: (1) historic separation of cultures and isolation of the traditional; (2) continuing discrimination against members of tradi- tional cultures; (3) productive limitations of the traditional cultures; and (4) limited availability of productive resources to traditional people, particularly adequate education and capital.

Introduction

Understanding the biological, economic and motiva- tional bases for human productivity is essential to more effective development activity in the Third World. One way to develop this understanding is to study spatial patterns of productivity.

This paper describes spatial patterns of productivity

* School of Renewable Natural Resources, 325 Rio. Science East, University of .Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, U.S.A.

in human ecosystems in South West Africa, or Namibia. It further attempts to relate them to spatial influences of apartheid as well as to certain persistent cultural characteristics observed there.

The most important challenge facing ecologists, particularly applied ecologists, is that of describing and explaining spatial differences in productivity. Production is the principal, perhaps the only, function of any ecosystem or community. Indeed, if there were a single ‘direction’ in biological and cultural evolu- tion, it is that of generally increased productivity of ecological communities. The result is more produc-

329

330

tion per unit input, whether the input is space, time, energy or materials. Production and productivity are the two central concepts in ecology.

In spite of the fact that humans are masters at man- ipulating ecosystem productivity for their own ends, there is little explicit understanding of basic principles of production and productivity. We manage to man- ipulate the productivity of our ecosystems to favor the products we prefer and diminish the products we do not. This, in truth, we do virtually every waking moment, yet we have little objective understanding of what we are doing. Much of what we cause is inadvertent. Too many positive results are serendipitous.

If we better understood production and productivity, we could manipulate more effectively, with fewer ineffectual and/or inadvertent results. This is of central importance to Third World development activities. Development is, in truth, nothing more nor less than attempting to manipulate the productivity of human ecosystems. Better understanding the eco- logical principles involved in productivity will lead to more sensitive and effective development efforts.

One approach to better understanding ecological pro- ductivity involves describing and finding causes for its spatial variation. Productivity varies dramatically from place to place depending on such variables as climate or microclimate, substrate, seed sources, water and nutrient availability, competitors, raw materials, cultural behaviors, political boundaries, public policy, and the like. Understanding the reasons for this spatial heterogeneity affords us a better understanding of productive processes. This, in turn, allows us to manipulate productivity in our eco- systems more to our satisfaction.

Three kinds of productivity are considered important in human ecosystems (WILKIN, 1988). These are: (1) biological productivity, the most fundamental of all (e.g. crops, livestock, people, wildlife, natural vegetation, pests, disease organisms, etc.); (2) economic productivity (the production and exchange of goods and services using common systems of valua- tion), derived from and to some extent dependent on biological productivity; and (3) needs satisfaction productivity (perceptions of satisfaction relative to one’s hierarchy of personal values, needs and desires), the least well measured and, in all likeli- hood, the most important of the three.

In this paper, the productivity of two distinct human

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 311989

ecosystems in Namibia, the ‘traditional’ and the ‘com- mercial’, are compared. Tentative explanations are suggested for the spatial variations found there.

The Study Area

Figure 1 shows the territory of South West Africa. herein called Namibia, and its location on the African continent. For the purposes of this work, the territory consists of three distinct areas (Figure 2), two being of central importance here (the state-owned land is, to all intents and purposes, uninhabited). The ‘tradi- tional’ areas are inhabited entirely by indigenous black cultures. Traditional life-styles predominate; communal ownership of land is the norm.

The ‘commercial’ areas contain all the white or ‘European’ population as well as blacks and mixed- race coloreds who have left the traditio~lal areas for urban residence. Life-styles in these areas are more Western, or more modern. Private ownership of land predomillates.

Comprising an area larger than West Germany and France combined, with only 1.15 million ethnically diverse people, Namibia is a vast, sparsely populated land. The Owambos, Kavangos and Caprivis, who

SOUTHERN AFRICA

“(%-d”BLlC OF 0 I,01 1 \ SOUTH AFRICA

‘I $

i

Is* .,I

ssi

, /-

< ..lil>

. (1*,11(/L ’ k

I?,

-i^---J~i-.’ 1

Figure 1. tocation of South West Africa (Namibia) in southern Africa.

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 3/1989 331

ANGOLA

ATLANTIC

OWNERSHIP

REPiLiLlC-OF

SOUTH AFRICA

Figure 2. Three major land ownership areas in South West Africa (Namibia).

comprise three-quarters of the total population, are concentrated on only 15% of the area in the extreme north, bordering Angola (FIRST NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 1986). The majority of Namibians live a communal, traditional life-style. Whites a.re only 5% of the total population, but the commercia.1 area contains approximately 15% of the total population, including coloreds (mixed- race) and blacks.

A Brief History of Namibia

In the early BOOS, English, German and Portuguese missionaries established themselves throughout southwestern Africa (DU PISANI, 1986). In time, the English and F’ortuguese turned their missions in the area over to the Germans in order to consolidate operations elsewhere. Soon, German missionaries and colonists were beginning to contend seriously with the indigenous people for water and grazing. They petitioned the German government for pro- tection. German military forces were sent in, ostensibly to protect both colonists and indigenous groups, partly from each other. This, of course,

involved placing the indigenous people on fixed native reserves and restricting their movement. Lands were then confiscated and turned over to white colonists. Apartheid had begun.

In 1915, South Africa’s military wrested the territory from the Germans. After the First World War, the League of Nations mandated South Africa to administer the territory, at which time South Africa began to put its own racial policies in place. This translated by the early 1960s to the full suite of apartheid policies, including restrictions on inter- racial marriage, use of public facilities, location of residence, right to work or even be present in certain areas, pass and identification requirements, complete political disenfranchisement, and the like. Un- officially, it also included severely restricting any economic potential these groups had by isolating them physically, dominating their commerce with white entrepreneurs, and restricting their capital availability.

Following the Second World War, the League of Nations was disbanded. After the United Nations was established in 1948, disputes between them and South

332

Africa arose concerning the legality of South Africa’s jurisdiction over Namibia (OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR-GENERAL, 1987). By the late 197Os, this dispute resulted in an agreement to grant Namibia its independence. That agreement has not been implemented as yet, due to South Africa’s con- cern over Russian and Cuban presence in Angola, just to the north. After the agreement, however, much of the apartheid policy was abolished in Namibia except for racially segregated schools and health care facilities (DU PISANI, 1986).

In spite of the easing of official apartheid restrictions, there has been little obvious change in the life of the average Namibian. Discriminatory practices con- tinue, there being no general prosecution laws to prohibit them. No affirmative programs have been implemented to correct existing inequalities. Draconian ‘security’ measures weigh most heavily on members of traditional cultures. As will be seen in the following section, the differences in productivity between the two areas are dramatic.

Productivity in Namibia

Biological productivity

Availability of water sets an upper limit on biological productivity, and Namibia is certainly quite arid. Nonetheless, Namibia’s biological productivity is more strongly controlled by regional cultural differences than by distribution of moisture.

Precipitation varies from only 20 mm per year in the south and west to over 700 mm in the extreme north- east (VAN DER MERWE, 1983). Three-quarters of Namibia’s people live in the northern traditional areas which average over 400 mm per year. These areas are bounded on the north by three perennial rivers. The Cunene has an average annual flow of 5.6 billion m3 per year, the Kavango 10.6 billion and the Zambesi 36 billion (HEYNS, 1987). Actual with- drawals from these rivers for irrigation or household use is minuscule.

The great majority of whites live in the central and southern part of the territory, in areas with an average precipitation of 100-300 mm. There are no perennial streams in the area. The Orange River, a large perennial stream in the extreme south of Namibia with 6 billion m3 per year average flow, is claimed entirely by South Africa, so is not available to Namibians (HEYNS, 1987).

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 30989

Human population growth is exceptionally high in the traditional areas. Averaging 3.5% per year with a doubling time of 20 years, some areas have experienced a natural rate of increase of close to 5% (FIRST NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COR- PORATION, 1986).

The commercial areas are experiencing generally slower growth as people migrate in from traditional areas seeking work. The white population is actually decreasing at the rate of approximately 1% per year. Their emigration has apparently been induced by concern over future political uncertainty.

While livestock numbers are high in the traditional areas, productivity is low (DE KLERK, 1987). Most of the resources devoted to these populations are used entirely to maintain an exceptionally high standing crop. Culturally, livestock are seen principally as a highly visible form of wealth. There is practically no interest in marketing them. The animals, in turn, overutilize the forage resources, reducing forage productivity. This results in loss of both soil and moisture, further reducing the potential for plant growth (SHAW, 1987).

Namibia’s agricultural ministry estimates the area’s livestock carrying capacity as nearly 50% lower than at the turn of the century, with most of that decrement occurring in the past 8 years, a time of severe drought. The higher average precipitation in these areas is of little biologically productive effect because of systematic overgrazing of the plant community.

Historically, periodic droughts reduced the size of livestock populations. Because plant communities could reestablish more quickly than livestock popula- tions after the end of a drought, the vegetation was able to recover both more fully and more often than now. At present, however, with governmental water development for livestock watering, most animals survive, and the plant community remains severely overused.

In commercial farming areas, the slightly larger number of animal units (l,lOO,OOO cattle in com- mercial areas against 850,000 in traditional areas, and 670,000 commercial goats against 925,000 traditional) (VAN DER MERWE, 1983) is distributed over an area perhaps 5 times as large. This area, because it has not been so badly overused, has a much higher current carrying capacity. Because the commercial animals are marketed (or harvested) at a young age, produc- tivity is much higher.

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 311989

In excess of 90% of crops marketed in Namibia are grown in the commercial areas. While there is exten- sive subsistence agriculture in the traditional areas, little is marketed (DE KLERK, 1987).

Wildlife productivity is much higher in the state- owned and commercial areas than in the traditional. Traditional cultural attitudes result in wildlife being treated either as pests or as exploitable resources. Both large and small game animals have all but been eliminated from the northern traditional areas due to habitat degradation and poaching (JOUBERT, 1987).

Commercial farmers now encourage wildlife produc- tivity on their ranges since these animals are generally thought to convert feed more efficiently (are more highly productive) than domestic stock, and there is a growing market for the products. Some farmers earn additional income by providing hunting opportunities on their private lands.

Economic productivity

Agricultural productivity has dimensions of both biological productivity and economic productivity. For cultural reasons, the traditional areas market virtually no livestock. Primarily, they do not want to. Secondarily, they couldn’t if they wanted because of the inability to control livestock diseases in communal grazing systems (SHAW, 1987). Only a few percent of the total crops marketed in Namibia come from the traditional areas (DE KLERK, 1987). Most of the area is operating at below subsistence level, requiring cash income to import food 4 months a year. This production shortfall is growing worse as fertility is lost.

Retail trade in the traditional areas was under 10 million rands in 1977. This is compared with over 200 million rands in the commercial areas. While no more recent data are available to compare the two areas, there is little reason to believe the relationship between them has changed substantially. At constant 1980 prices, the 1986 figure for the territory as a whole is only 5% lower than that of 1977 (VAN DER MERWE, 1983).

In 1983, the economically active population, defined as workers employed at least part-time per 1000 population, was between 0 and 250 in the traditional areas. The average is estimated to be less than 150, and many of those are part-time employees.

333

The comparable figure for the commercial areas is between 250 and 450 workers per 1000 population. These figures, however, include large numbers of urban blacks, for whom the best guess is an unemploy- ment rate of over 50%. Whites, not surprisingly, have the lowest unemployment rate in the territory.

Other primary sectors in the economy are located almost exclusively in the commercial areas. Fisheries, mining, construction, agriculture and manufacturing are there, as are a disproportionate part of govern- ment, financial services, energy, transport and com- munication facilities.

Needs satisfaction productivity

Needs satisfaction is not routinely measured even in the developed world. In the Third World, we have only the vaguest notion of levels of satisfaction. Since there are no direct measures for this, the best we can do is to cite statistics that provide a few inferential comparisons between the traditional and commercial areas of Namibia. Even this is severely limited. Rela- tive levels of needs satisfaction can only be inferred where the two communities share the same values, and it is increasingly apparent in Namibia that there is little overlap in the two value systems. Comparability is severely restricted.

There is apparent dissatisfaction with the availability of jobs in the traditional areas. Substantial anecdotal evidence supports this. When a job is advertised, even for hard physical labor, hundreds of people apply. Often, when the author was conversing with black Namibians, the unavailability of jobs was heatedly raised. On one occasion, a beery group of three implored him tearfully to “tell ‘them’ out there” of the need for jobs. Those who have jobs tolerate substantial abuse to keep them, including long hours, low pay, extreme travel distances, abusive supervi- sion, and no retirement, medical or unemployment benefits. As mentioned previously, in 1983 the economically active portion of the population was substantially lower in traditional areas than in com- mercial areas (VAN DER MERWE, 1983).

Education is another value shared in common between the two areas. In the traditional areas, the proportion of total population in schools is about 38% (DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION, 1986). For the commercial areas, the figure is only 25%. Rapid population growth in traditional areas has produced a very young population, half of which

334

is under age 15. In the commercial areas, the corres- ponding age is nearer the middle-twenties. The tradi- tional areas thereby have a higher proportion of population of school age. These high enrollment figures mask several serious problems, however (BURGER, 1987).

While 11% of students in the commercial areas have reached the equivalent of tenth grade (standard 8) or higher, for the traditional areas that figure is only about 4%. Standard testing criteria yield a substan- tially lower pass rate for schools in traditional areas at all levels. Traditional schools are known to be inferior in availability of electricity, library materials, textbooks, and in teacher qualifications. Compound- ing this, as students in traditional areas reach the higher levels, it becomes more apparent that job opportunities are limited. Incentive to continue is very low. The typical student in traditional areas has neither the same opportunity nor incentive to pro- gress through standard grade levels as one in the commercial area.

Health-related satisfaction is difficult to compare. The commercial areas show the typical suite of health problems typical of the Western, developed world (DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND

WELFARE, 1986). In sharp contrast, though reliable data are not available, medical professionals in the traditional areas repeatedly mention infant mortality, tuberculosis, malaria, venereal disease, malnutrition, infectious diseases, parasites, alcoholism and family violence as major health problems (BERGER, 1987; SHIVUTE, 1987; PARKHOUSE, 1987). In addi- tion, the insidious psychological effects of the long- lasting state of warfare are mounting. The Medical Superintendent of the hospital at Oshakati, Dr Nester Shivute, estimated that psychological traumas are far more serious and widespread in Namibia than physical traumas. He suggested that war-related psychological problems may be the single most serious health problem in the area. Large expendi- tures are urgently needed for mental health facilities and personnel to handle the growing case load of debilitating anxiety neuroses.

Again, based only on anecdotal evidence, substantial dissatisfaction exists in the traditional areas with the territory’s governance. Three major political groups in the territory are refusing to participate in the current government. These are the South West Africa People’s Organization, headed by Sam Nujoma, Rev. Peter Kalangula’s Christian Democratic Party, and Chief Justus Garoeb’s Damara Council. These three

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 30989

groups probably account for a majority of people in the traditional areas, though no official poll has been taken.

In the commercial areas, judging from newspaper editorials, there is apparently much greater support for the current government, which is predominantly black. This is in spite of the presence of an Adminis- trator-General appointed by the State President of South Africa, and the fact that the government is not elected but appointed by various means.

Factors Contributing to Productivity Differences

At present, there is no way to say with certainty what has caused such striking differences in productivity between the traditional and the commercial areas of Namibia, however obvious it may seem. It is likely, however, that a number of factors contribute inter- actively, not all of them under the control of white Namibians or South Africans.

The following contributory factors are postulated: (1) separation of cultures and isolation of the traditional; (2) continuing discrimination against members of traditional cultures; (3) productive limitations of the traditional cultures; and (4) limited availability of productive resources to traditional people, particu- larly adequate education and capital. These will be briefly discussed.

Cultural separation and isolation

Cultures as different as the European and the indigenous blacks would have integrated only slowly, even without official barriers. Their values were different, often conflicting. The notion of extensive commerce with and travel to foreign markets would have been undreamed of by most traditional blacks. These activities, however, were a principal pursuit of the European colonists (DU PISANI, 1986). The blacks had little to contribute except manual labor. They were, in general, excluded from the process. With the establishment of native reserves, reinforced later by pass laws, most blacks were kept far from the centers of commerce in the country. Their physical isolation not only ensured they would not become involved in commerce, it helped maintain the difference in value systems that isolated them socially as well. Little synergy was possible between the two groups. The relationship was almost entirely exploita- tive.

Geoforum~olume 20 Number 311989

Discrimination

Today, in spite of the repeal of much of the official apartheid policy, discrimination is rampant. Most of it is economic. While there are no policy restrictions against a black buying a home in the plushest area in Windho~k, Walvis Bay or Swakopmund~ there are certainly economic ones. Only in the highest levels of government service: can a black be expected to make an adequate salary. Such lucrative employment opportunities are obviously extremely rare.

Discriminatory hiring and promotion practices, in the absence of any general prosecution law against them (SMUTZ, 1987) and with no officially sanctioned corrective programs, are the rule. This is exacerbated by a substantial surplus of available labor. The pay for blacks and coloreds, as a result, is uniformly low-so low as to preclude any real possibility of buying a home anywhere except in a black or colored town- ship, or of starting a viable business requiring initial capital. Job security is low as well, so financial institu- tions are reluctant lo lend.

Cultural limitations

The concept of productivity is defined by values. There are sharp differences between the two cultures discussed here in economic values and needs satisfac- tion values. Thus, from a Western, white perspective, the traditional black, who would rather sit in front of his kraal and drink beer while his children herd the cattle and goats, is being unproductive. He is viewed as needing to undergo a process called development. It often does not work.

There is much frustration in trying to promote Western approaches to economic growth. Many of the target people simply are not interested. Such programs are not responsive to their values (PARKHOUSE, 1987). The issue is often confused by the fact that they will feign interest, often just to be polite. Sometimes they are interested, but only as a break in the monotony, until the development workers leave.

Values aside, however, from a Western perspective, three cultural characteristics operate against increases in productivity for the traditional Namibians. These are: (a) communal grazing, (b) ethnic/tribal chauvinism, and (c) high rates of popula- tion growth.

While private ownership of housing, clothing, tools,

335

livestock, garden plots, food harvesting areas and personal effects is well recognized and accepted among traditional cultures, the concept does not normally apply to grazing land. Communal grazing is the rule. This carries a number of costs. First, even if the traditional people wanted to market their hve- stock out of the area, they could not because of livestock diseases. These diseases can not be effec- tively controlled without fences to control movement of the animals (SHAW, 1987). Under communal grazing, there is no effective isolation or control of animal movement.

In addition, few traditional people recognize the desirability of managing their grazing lands for higher productivity. Unless all agree on management strategies and are willing to see that all participate equally, no individual is willing to make the effort. The major range improvement strategy required, at this point, is to reduce the numbers of grazing animals until the forage recovers. Traditionally, however, livestock are wealth. Few are willing to sacrifice the direct evidence of their well-being unless everyone does the same. Tribal leaders in the area are resisting the privatization of land recommended by the Agricultural Ministry (DE KLERK, 1987). The grazing lands are likely to remain overgrazed. Produc- tivity will remain low.

Tribal or ethnic chauvinism still plays a role in limiting the productivity of traditional Namibians. Both economic and political power derive from groups of people associating for common or complementary purposes. While the dozen or so ethnic groupings of Namibian blacks are discriminated against by the European community in a most egalitarian way, they have shown little willingness to cooperate among themselves to formulate common strategies for reprisal.

The 3-5% human population growth rates in the traditional areas guarantee that most of the available productive resources are going to be consumed just providing for bare subsistence. The population will continue to outgrow agricultural productivity, health care and educational facilities. There will continue to be a surplus of labor which has the extreme potential to be translated into severe competition for jobs and abusive labor practices.

Productive resource limitations

Education, as it is offered in traditional areas of Namibia, is no panacea. Underqualified teachers are

336

the norm (BURGER, 1987; AFRIKANER, 1987). Schools lack texts, libraries, and often electricity. The subject matter is highly academic and theoretical. Learning is heavily rote memorization. There is little problem-identification or problem-solving.

There is a move in the direction of English as the medium of instruction. Teachers, by and large, do not know English, which makes it awkward.

The goal is to become ‘educated’ so one can get a suit-and-tie job and not have to do physical labor. This, unfortunately, does not reflect the reality of economic opportunities in the territory.

The sanctions policy of the United States against the Republic of South Africa has been applied, without qualification or modification, to Namibia (U.S. SENATE, 1986). Thus, the little capital available for development is largely from internal sources. In Namibia’s struggling economy, little is available after the maintenance needs of the developed sector of the economy are taken care of.

Productivity theory centers on the cooperative asso- ciation of groups of people for common or com- plementary purposes (WILKIN, 1988). One of the highest forms of human cooperative behavior, it suggests, is capital investment. Both the capitalist and the entrepreneur benefit if the capital is put to produc- tive enterprise. Productive economic enterprise would, theoretically, be impossible or very difficult in the absence of investment. The increased produc- tivity made possible by the investment not only profits the entrepreneur and his employees but the investor as well.

Investment capital, however, is unfortunately a major limiting resource for development of productivity in Namibia. The black Namibian is the person suffering most seriously at present from its shortage. While sanctions, as an expression of moral outrage, may have some value, they are clearly not accomplishing the intended purpose, i.e. the provision of equal opportunity for nonwhite Namibians. Much more rational consideration must be given in Western pol- icy toward both Namibia and South Africa, in terms of desired outcomes as well as in terms of means. Equality of opportunity has little meaning in the absence of an adequately productive foundation.

Summary and Conclusions

Beginning with the German isolation of indigenous groups in native ‘reserves’ late last century, there

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 3/1989

have been substantial and persistent differences in productivity between traditional and commercial areas of the territory. For over 80 years, the ‘apar- theid’ policies of Germany and South Africa contri- buted to both promoting productivity in the commer- cial areas, and to restricting it in traditional areas. Interaction between the two cultures was, by design, only what little was required to exploit the labor of indigenous blacks. There was little mutualistic inte- gration in either direction.

Today, official policies separating the two groups are significantly reduced. The political boundaries remain, but they operate now less to maintain cultural separation than to provide a convenient barrier against livestock diseases and militant insurgency from north to south.

Nonetheless, sharp differences in productivity between the two areas remain. Except for human reproduction, biological productivity in the tradi- tional areas is very low. There is a vast disparity between the two in economic productivity; that, in fact, may be the principal distinguishing cultural characteristic, i.e. the propensity to engage or not engage in production and exchange of goods and services.

Needs satisfaction productivity cannot be adequately compared between the two areas, because cultural values are so different. Nonetheless, in those cases where the two cultures share the same values, the traditional areas have lower satisfaction. There seems little convergence to date.

From a theoretical perspective, there is support here for a rough spatial correlation among biological, economic, and needs satisfaction productivity. Certainly, economic productivity depends on and can be limited by biological productivity. While it remains to be adequately demonstrated, it seems probable that needs satisfaction productivity would be partly dependent on and potentially limited by both bio- logical and economic productivity. The relation between economic productivity and needs satisfac- tion productivity, however, remains obscure. There is strong support only for the fact that needs satisfac- tion productivity is not adequately measured.

At present, the patterns of productivity in Namibia are not driven by availability of moisture or any other geographic distribution of prebiotic resources. The logic seems inescapable. The unbalanced interaction between the two cultures is an inevitable result of

Geoforum/Volume 20 Number 30989

highly persistent cultural differences between them. These differences, and the resulting unbalanced relationship, have not disappeared with the abolition of discriminatory public policy. The current lower levels of officially sanctioned discrimination are of little positive effect. The cultural values and practices persist. So long as they do, the relationship between the two cultures will change only very slowly, and not necessarily in the direction of equal opportunity.

‘Color blind’ public policy is a fine sounding ideal, but will not address the continuing problem. Until official public policy in Namibia is directed toward altering the relationship between the two cultures, particu- larly toward correcting past inequities and injustices and providing true equality of opportunity, sharp differences in productivity will persist. If such a policy were coupled with a more enlightened policy on the part of Western nations to stimulate development in traditional areas in concert with values held there (not necessarily Western), the differences in produc- tivity could become significantly less important, to the benefit of all Namibians.

References

BERGER, D. (1987) Personal communication, Okavango Administration, Rundu.

BURGER L. (l987) Personal communication, Government of National Unity.

337

DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WEL- FARE (1986) Health Status Report for South West Africa/Namibia 1986, Government of National Unity.

DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION (1986) Statistics of Schools: 1983 to 1986. Government of National Unity.

DU PISANI, A. (1986) SWAINumibia: the Politics ofContinuity and Change. Jonathan Ball, Johannesburg.

FIRST NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COR- PORATION (1986) Southwest Africa/Namibia: Infor- mation for Investors, 3rd Edition, John Meinert, Windhoek.

HEYNS, P. (1987) Personal communication, Department of Water Affairs, Government of National Unity.

JOUBERT, E. (1987) Personal communication, Depart- ment of Agriculture and Nature Conservation, Govern- ment of National Unity.

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR-GENERAL (1987) A History of the Negotiations on the Independence of SWAINumibiu. Unpublished briefing document, Windhoek.

PARKHOUSE, A. (1987) Personal communication, Com- munity Development Division, Government of National Unity.

SHAW, J. (1987) Personal communication, Department of Agriculture and Nature Conservation, Government of National Unity.

SHIVUTE, N. (1987) Personal communication, Owambo Hospital, Oshakati.

SMUTZ, D. (1987) Personal communication, Windhoek. VAN DER MERWE, J. H. (1983) National Atlas of South

West Africa. Development Coordination Directorate, South West Africa.

WILKIN, D. C. (1988) The Namibian opportunity: development of productivity in Southwest Africa, Manu- script in preparation.